When is a war costly? Standards seem to be changing

The AP has finally recognized it: we haven't lost that many troops in Iraq compared to other wars.

One casualty is a tragedy. But 3,000 deaths in Iraq are very few casualties as American wars have historically gone. We lost 57,000, for example, in Vietnam, We lost about 400,000 in World War II, and well over a hundred thousand in World War II. At the present rate, we would match the Vietnam total some time early in the next century.

No, it's not that the American people are more sensitive than they were during previous wars. It's just that the political opposition and the media have undermined American support for this war from the outset, and convinced the American people psychologically that the war has been more costly than it actually has been. Then, too, the Administration never did a very good job of making the stakes clear. And as is noted in the last paragraph of the story, we're no longer a society that's particularly into self-sacrifice any more.

Maybe we're simply seeing the decline of our civilization being expressed in a new way.

Comments